## Facts

- Magaragada Mvududu held Farm 227 in the Rowa Purchase Area and had five sons, including the eldest son Mwashinga and a younger son Enoch.
- Two sons already held separate farms; Enoch and other younger sons lived on Farm 227.
- Anticipating his death, Magaragada convened the family and, consistent with local African customary law, indicated that Mwashinga would be the heir and family head with duties to support the parents and hold property for the family.
- Because contemporaneous land administration rules limited registration to one purchase-area farm per person and Mwashinga already had a farm, the family plan was that Enoch would be the registered holder of Farm 227 while Mwashinga would exercise customary control for family benefit.
- Magaragada died before the plan was implemented; an official transferred Farm 227 into Enoch’s name and certified Enoch as the customary heir.
- Enoch later died, and his son John sought transfer of Farm 227 into John’s name, asserting that Enoch had been the true customary heir and that John inherited through Enoch.
- Other family members obtained an interdict restraining John from transferring the farm pending adjudication.
- At trial, John claimed Magaragada designated Enoch due to Enoch’s contributions to the farm; the rest of the family gave contrary evidence supporting eldest-son heirship.
- The court heard testimony from a local customary-law authority (a sabuku) describing the local rule: inherited family land devolves to the eldest son, and thereafter passes along the line of brothers rather than to the deceased heir’s son.

## Issues

1. Under the applicable African customary law, who was the rightful heir to Magaragada’s family land: the eldest son (Mwashinga) or the younger son (Enoch) who became the registered holder?
2. Whether the younger son’s administrative registration and an official’s certification of heirship could displace customary succession and allow the registered holder’s son to take transfer as of right.
3. How the court should resolve conflicting evidence about the deceased’s intended succession arrangement and the operative local custom.

## Decision

- The High Court rejected John’s claim that Enoch was the customary heir and that John could inherit Farm 227 through Enoch.
- The court accepted evidence that, under the relevant custom and the deceased’s family arrangement, the eldest son was the heir and held the property for family benefit.
- The court treated the younger son’s registration and the official certification of heirship as administrative acts that did not determine the substantive customary-law devolution.
- The court therefore refused to allow transfer of Farm 227 into John’s name on the basis asserted.

## Legal Principles

- Under the relevant African customary law, family land inherited from an ancestor devolves upon the eldest son as heir and family head, typically with obligations to maintain the household and hold property for the broader family rather than as absolute personal ownership.
- Customary heirship is distinct from formal registration of title; registration arrangements adopted to comply with administrative rules do not, without more, alter the customary line of succession.
- An official’s mistaken certification of customary heirship does not determine succession where credible evidence of local custom and family intention proves a different customary heir.
- Customary succession to inherited family land may follow a fraternal line (to the next brother) rather than passing from a deceased heir to that heir’s son, depending on the proved local custom.

## Conclusion

The court applied proved local customary succession rules and held that administrative registration and an erroneous official designation could not redirect inherited family land from the eldest-son heirship structure to the registered younger son’s descendant, defeating the grandson’s attempt to take transfer as of right.


Mvududu v. Mvududu N.O. & Others, 1981 Z.L.R. 397 (Zim. High Ct. Gen. Div. 1981)